linking constraints like requirements?

[kimballjohnson]

What do you do with constraints?

By using the external button in the requirements tab, its possible to consolidate requirements in a requirements model and then realize them in a testing model.

Things stay organized that way and its possible to deliver documents in a standardized way for most organizations.

However, what do you do with constraints?

How do you link them and manage them and centralize them and attach them to tests and other real-life things?

I'm considering using the Requirements tab for these as well.

Any insights appreciated.

Thanks,

Kimball Johnson

[bioform]

Constraints that are applied to multiple "things" I model as external requirements with my "defined" requirement type constraint...

My use of the constraints tab currently is limited to my Usecase elements. I use to constraints and their types to document my UC's Pre-Condition(s) using that type, Post-Conditions, using that type, and my Minimum and Success Guarantee(s) using the "process" type.

The OCL type could be used (I'm assuming) to document the "constrainsts" on business objects, etc....

Currently, I am only using the constraint tab to support generating fully dressed usecase...

[Eve]

There is a constraint element that can be used and linked to any elements.  Try accessing it using the quicklinker under the common group.  Then link it to other elements by using the 'Link' option in the quicklinker.

[erixon]

I don't see this constraint element.  The common elements list (accessed via the quick linker) that I see only includes:

Diagram Frame
Boundary
Note
Text
Diagram Notes
Diagram Legend
HyperLink

[bioform]

Also, I believe the "Quick-Linker" is context sensitive, it does not provide a link to ALL possible features...

Also, I don't see any mention of an 'constraint' element that is available... You could create a stereotyped requirement as a 'constraint' then use this to establish the link, but I would go back to my original comment, and just create the "requirement" type value of constraint (that EA stores in the 'stereotype' field anyway...

... waiting for clarification from EA Administrator...
AND hat's off and thanks for the great job these 'EA Administrator' do! <grin>

[Eve]

You get the list of elements you described if you right click on a diagram you select 'Create Element or Connector' | 'Common Elements'.  This is not what I was talking about.

If you select any element on a diagram you get a little arrow to the top right.  If you click and drag this to an empty space on the diagram you get a list of elements to create and connections to them.  This is context sensitive, but to my knowledge everything gives you access to the common menu in this situation.  In this menu you'll find Note, Constraint, Document, Artifact, Issue and Change.

For more information on the quick linker, have a look at http://www.sparxsystems.com.au/EAUserGuide/index.html?quick_linker_elements.htm

[erixon]

Thank you for the clarification!

[bioform]

I just tried what you suggested... It appears that this is in affect a special type of note (stereotype)?

When you do this as described, the link is of the type "notelink', rather than one of the the associations...

My questions would be:

1. Where in the table structure of an EA project is this stored?

2. If you were planning on using this to model a constraints, then when you declare the common object to be created, should you not then be required to specify the association? It creates a non-directional, non-UML association (I believe) rather than allowing you to specify the association as one of dependency, trace, or information flow...

3. Is this object available during RTF generation?

My Thoughts...
Seems like the better modeling approach would be to stereotype a requirement into a constraint (then of course the problem is how do you specify the 'type' of constraint; like design, resource, etc. since the "stereotype" field of the object is now occupied... A work-around would be to create a tagged value to be associated with a requirement profile...

ANYONE have any comments on modeling constraints (that are external and map to many objects)?

[Eve]

Yes, internally this is similar to a note and connected with a notelink.  This isn't a UML connection, but then it is internal so it doesn't matter.  When it's exported to XMI 2.1, it is exported in conformantly in a way that other tools should be able to read.  Something a stereotyped requirement won't be able to do since a Requirement isn't even a UML object.

I'm afraid I don't know much about RTF documentation, I just did a quick generation using the Basic template and it wasn't included.  I don't know if it's accessible in some other way.

[«Midnight»]

Still Simon, IMHO this is something that should be added to the templates. There are options that are sensitive to notes - the regular kind - in the document generation dialogs. Why not ensure this useful feature (whether using linked constraints or requirements) is included.

With 7.0 beginning to gel, this would be a good time to get this into the mix.

David